Breach - Judgment Search Results

Breach Candy Hospital Trust Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and o ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2010)228CTR(Bom)381

Matched in: Parties Breach Candy Hospital Trust Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.

The Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust and Others Vs. Dipesh Mehta and O ...

Court: Mumbai

perpetual injunction may be granted. In the first place, a perpetual injunction may be granted to prevent the breach of an obligation, which exists in favour of the plaintiff. Secondly, a perpetual injunction may be granted to

Breach Candy Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai Vs. Babulal B. Parde ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [2001(91)FLR1185]; 2002(2)MhLj227

111 of 2000 instituted by him, was employed as a general helper in (lie Engineering Department of the Breach Candy Hospital and Research Centre on 1st January, 1975. On 13th January, 1988 a chargesheet was issued to

Breach Candy Hospital and Research Centre Vs. Babulal B. Pardeshi

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1998(79)FLR533]; (1998)IILLJ515Bom

the award.6. Accordingly, during pendency of the writ petition, the following order shall remain operative.(i) The petitioner employer Breach Candy Hospital Research Centre shall pay to the workman Respondent No. 1 Shri Babulal B. Pardeshi wages every

Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2007)(114)ECC42

Matched in: Parties Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Breach Candy Hospital and Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(70)ECC123

of five years from the date the air-conditioners are installed in such establishment, and in the event of breach of any of the terms of the undertaking aforesaid, he shall pay, on behalf of the manufacturer, the

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City Vs. Breach Candy Swimming Bath ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1955Bom250; (1955)57BOMLR84; ILR1955Bom268

Chagla, C.J.1. The assessee is the Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust, an association of persons, and the main question that arises on this reference is

Collusion Between Respondents No.1 and 2 (iii) there Is a Fundamental ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

No.1 is a result of fraud and collusion between respondents No.1 & 2, (iii) there is a fundamental breach PUSHPINDER SAINI201408.07 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh of the